DM: Is Duchess Meghan making the same media mistakes as Princess Diana?

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex arrive at the Endeavour Fund Awards

This morning, Kensington Palace surprised the hell out of me. The palace announced that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will be making one more international trip before the Royal Polo Baby is born. KP posted this: “The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will visit Morocco from Saturday 23rd February to Monday 25th February 2019. This visit is at the request of Her Majesty’s Government.” It seems like they’re cutting it very close to Meghan’s due date, especially if you’re like me and you believe that there’s no way that Meghan is due in mid to late April. Still, it’s just another reminder of how active Meghan has been throughout her first pregnancy.

Meanwhile, we’re getting our first big look into how the British media has reacted to Meghan authorizing her friends to speak to People Magazine for their cover story this week. We knew there would be some reaction, of course, because if it’s one thing that the British royal reporters hate more than being called out on their biased and racist reporting, it’s when royal figures refuse to work biased and racist royal reporters. The UK papers will “punish” Meghan for authorizing her friends to speak to People Magazine.

Richard Kay at the Daily Mail has already started the punishment, with this DM piece. Kay says that the People story “emasculates” Harry and that Meghan probably authorized this herself, without the palace’s knowledge (I disagree). Kay compared Meghan unfavorably to Princess Diana, because Diana had a habit of authorizing her friends to speak up for her interests too. Kay should know – Diana used to brief him off-the-record, and she would authorize her friends to speak to him too. Basically, Kay’s piece feels like one big tantrum, and a “why didn’t she talk to BRITISH reporters?” piece. That being said, not every argument he makes is total garbage, it’s just that the one or two salient details or interesting observations are surrounded by so much bullsh-t, it’s hard to find them. What I’m starting to believe is that Meghan understands that there will be payback for going to People Magazine, but she did it as a threat to the UK tabloids. She’s telling them: “look, I have other means of telling my story too, and I will continue to tap out of your toxic narratives whenever I feel like it.”

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex arrive at the Endeavour Fund Awards

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

129 Responses to “DM: Is Duchess Meghan making the same media mistakes as Princess Diana?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Elisabeth says:

    Rebecca English has an article this morning saying the palace was only notified “moments” before the article was published, so I don’t think this had BP approval. Maybe her team at KP approved, but they’re notorious for doing whatever Will/Harry/Kate/Meghan want, often to their detriment. No one at KP says “no.”

    • 90sgirl says:

      The only ones who look bad are the British Tabloids with their constant lies and they know it.
      Excellent People issue, well done,
      Thank goodness her friends finally fought back at lies.

      The British tabloids lied on and abused, this woman from day one. the British press are the only ones who look bad in this.

      • RoyalBlue says:

        90sgirl I agree with you. It’s the abusive British tabloids that look badly. They are vicious and she should never kowtow to their demands. I think they are accustomed to royalty who sit silently and absorb the hate. Diana responded with tears and interviews but Meghan is fighting fire with fire and I am sure she has Harry’s support.

        I feel if someone is attacking me that I would fight back and that is exactly what she did. I agree with her approach

      • Eliza says:

        Personally i think the People article was too heavy handed. To counter act bad press they are over-compensating. I mean including details like she lit a candle as proof she’s an amazing friend is odd. It seems amateur. I’m sure they could put together a better profile on Meghans daily life (similar to Vanity Fair style) that would be a lot more flattering without the over the top worshipping. It feels rushed – her team could have done a lot better. Seriously she deserves better.

      • Milla says:

        But what was the point? Meg will always be better human than the royals. She just needs to show up and smile. If people like her, fine. If not, so what? It is sad that she thinks she needs to explain herself. Shes not in Hollywood, no one is gonna fire her cos of some bad publicity. Look at Phillip, he is racist, arrogant, nazi lover, and no one can touch him. Look at his sons, literally the only decent ones are harry and william. And remember as long as M looks bad, no one is gonna talk about c or andrew. First it was Kate, now Meg. Its how royals survive. Before it was fergie, diana, wallis,… names change narrative stays the same.

      • Nlopez says:

        +100 90s girl!

      • Tina says:

        Sigh. Yet again, Prince Philip literally fought the Nazis, in WWII. He was a hero in the Royal Navy. He is not a “nazi lover.”

    • MA says:

      I think it’s possible that H&M don’t trust everyone at KP and that not everyone at KP has their backs. I think that some at KP did know about this, but probably the people they feel they can actually trust. H&M have a very tight team around them who haven’t leaked about the BFA, Cookbook, their dogs, etc.

    • A says:

      I wouldn’t be surprised if the royals did authorize it, but in fact chose not to brief the regular group of royal reporters that this article would be coming out, precisely because they’re aware of how the coverage on Meghan is so bad and they don’t want to give them a head start on the response. We know that they’re struggling to respond to the racism and vitriol towards Meghan because it’s just so unlike anything they’ve ever experienced before. It could be that they’re shifting strategies for Meghan in a big way.

  2. 90sgirl says:

    Daily Mail crybabies, have been writing lie after lie for years about her and when one American Magazine helps her fight back by telling the Truth and that the British media are liarsthey have fits. DM just mad ,they were called out for their lies and can’t control all the narrative with their fake , crap, lieing stories.

    People Magazine was master stroke and caught many in the British tabloid press off guard. Well done. For calling out the British lieing tabloids who have had a agenda to damage Meghan from Day 1, Meghan never had a honeymoon period with the British tabloid, from day one it was Straigh outta Compton and downward it to lies and gutter crap from there.

    Well done Meghans friends and People!
    Excellent! master stroke of PR by the friends.
    Meghan is loved, despite what the Daily Mail wants people to believe and her friends were simply tired of the lies!

    • Bella DuPont says:

      One thing I’ve been wondering about…..I feel as though one of the reasons there was very little push-back against this marriage from the very top (Queen, Charles etc)…. was the realization that they could really use Meghan’s Citizenship + Multicultural background to really solidify their international appeal.

      If this is something they’re actually taking very seriously, then maybe that People’s article wasn’t meant for the UK market at all. Maybe they’d already baked in the blowback from the local papers, but believe the message (especially the religious angle) will play well in America + Common Wealth Countries.

      If that is the case, then it’s understandable

      • Milla says:

        But going t0 American press while living under the crown is not a good idea. Americans are not paying for the brf.
        That’s why i think this was mh idea, not approved by the palace.
        Diana’s scandals were against the brf, she was in war with them, not someone from the outside. It is really apples and oranges.

      • CHATNUH says:

        @Milla…………….LOL no Milla. First of all, the Duchess of Sussex IS AN AMERICAN CITIZEN and will have DUAL. CITIZENSHIP. (if she so chooses).
        For 36 years her home was North America (including Canada). in addition, because she operated in “the gold-fish bowl industry for the beautiful people,” i:e the entertainment industry, that also brings a global audience.
        She’s also a biracial woman.

        Given all the above, therefore, her presence in the BRF not only revives the interests of the citizens of the Commonwealth in the BRF, it also brings a new constituency of eyeballs on the BRF….i:e North America, Latin America and every other country that doesnt have a monarchy.

        So………..”going to the American press while living under the crown” is gonna be an idea going forward that the insular brits will have to get used to, i’m afraid. Sowwy.

      • Enough Already says:

        Don’t waste your breath, Milla. The Americans here love Meghan. They think going to the American press is a good idea. But Meghan is now supported by the British taxpayers, no matter her original citizenship. She owes allegiance to them. Going to People was a horrible idea, sure to make her American fans cheer, but equally certain to anger the British press and citizens, as well. I’m interested in MM’s popularity in the next poll. Things like this really can hurt her.

    • Ahoyoy says:

      I think it’s hilarious that they’re trying to pretend like Diana was anything but a master at media manipulation. 21 years after her death and people still won’t buy anything negative Charles has to say about their marriage. Keep making Diana’s ‘mistakes’, Meghan, you’ll be fine.

      • Christina says:

        Everything you said, Ahoyoy!!! Diana was no idiot. She was a woman who didn’t let the palace control the narrative. There is a reason Harry married Meghan. She’s a fighter, just like his mother. Doria Ragland gave her grace, but she’s a survivor, just like Diana was. And she is a pro because of her disfuncional family. People who have to navigate the complexities of narcissistic family can do well in public life every though everyone accuses them of being insincere or fake. It’s a skill you have to develop to survive that, and I admire it in people who use their powers for good.

  3. Vexa says:

    Everything we’ve heard – and even the anti-Meg brigade can’t deny it – is that the Queen really likes Meghan. So I don’t for a second believe she would jeopardise that goodwill by going rouge; I think BP knew that the People article was coming and they were ok with it.

    Also – Richard Kay really is a sucky baby, isn’t he??

    • Enn says:

      He’s such a whiner, I can’t even stand seeing his name anymore.

    • Jamie says:

      Richard Kay was telling on himself when he used the word “emasculating.” It was Kay who felt emasculated because H&M went to an American outlet.

  4. crogirl says:

    I don’t think the palace authorised the People story, Meghan and Harry probably acted on their own. Unfortunately it will probably do more damage than good.

    • Whatabout says:

      Yeap I agree. But I hate Richard Kay and avoid the dailymail articles about the royals.

      I think Megan has the right ideas but is maybe going about publicity in a Hollywood way. For a celebrity they’re able to do these stories than go quiet for months. Megan doesn’t have that luxury.

      • Vanessa says:

        The British press loves to tear Meghan down what paper in Britain would have been willing to allow Meghan American friends to sing her praise they been the ones who have made her public enemy number one with their bullying. Their no way any of the British publication would have been sympathetic toward Meghan she really needed to get her side across for too long the press her father and half sister were able to run wild out with lavish stories about her . I don’t understand why people are having such a problem with Meghan and Harry fighting back the palace had no problem defending Kate when their was rumors she wears hair extensions but for months on end a pregnant woman has relentlessly bullied by the British press and they did nothing . If Meghan and Harry don’t take a stand now how do you guys think they will report coverage of their baby do you really think that there would be racially charged code language to describe the first mix races baby in the royal family. It’s not Hollywood wanting to control the narrative of your own story every royal have their friends speak out about them if they are getting bad press . So what Meghan did is not big deal they only people who are complaining are the ones who profited off the negative coverage of Meghan and the people who th don’t like her .

    • Christina says:

      Crogirl, the British press has already smeared her and courted her crazy family members. She’d have to kill someone to make it worse. The royal press didn’t pay Thomas and Crazy sister, but that didn’t keep them from repeating the narrative. We are in a different time. This isn’t 30 years ago.

  5. HK9 says:

    It seems to me that the press have pretty much demonstrated that even if she plays by their ‘rules’ they’ll be negative anyway so what’s the pay off? If she’s working and the press are in a constant snit, it’s the press that come off badly.

    • 90sgirl says:

      Exactly.
      From the start, writing a book with Hub Kitichen ladies, to eating Avocados for lunch, they have criticised and accused her of the worst ,every single thing she has done, no matter what….so IMO an American Magazine pushing back on the lieing British Tabloid press was well done.
      An American Magazine fights back once and calls out the lies and the British tabloids get in a snit, fit about it.

      • Princessk says:

        Yes, and the British press totally ignored the fact that the book won an award a few days ago.

      • BeanieBean says:

        Yeah, I still can’t get over the blaming of Meghan for droughts & gang violence because she likes avocados. Truly beyond the pale.

  6. PoptartsYum says:

    They are playing with fire. The British press is awful and will make their lives miserable,

    So glad I am not a royal. How can Meghan live this way after being a free American? I would be miserable…

    No amount of money or any man is worth the loss of your freedom.

    • Vanessa says:

      They already made their lives miserable by harassing Meghan for the passed three years all the untrue stories about her. What’s to stop the British media for going after Meghan and Harry child I really hated this whole narrative of Meghan shouldn’t have married Harry he not worth it . So she allowed racist British press and racist internet trolls to control her life .

    • Bella DuPont says:

      Meghan and Harry are not entirely without recourse though…..it’s only the BRF’s preference not to engage that allows these bullies just roll on with their abuse.

      For instance, her sister clearly feels she can dump any amount of abuse on Meghan with no consequences because she *knows* Meghan is not allowed to retaliate. But if things got really dirty, she has to also know that she could get squashed simply by being caught up in lengthy, costly legal battles that will drain her of whatever peanuts she’s sold her non-existent soul for so far.

  7. 90sgirl says:

    PEOPLE was the best thing done for Meghan is years since engagement. The British tabloid and haters are just ticked that they got called out for their lies.

    Well done PEOPLE.
    Rebecca English who works for the Daily Mail and the Daily Mail who spread the constant lies and hate is not an authority I would trust at all.

    British tabloids are just mad an American Magazine did their own reporting on her, instead of parroting the lies coming from British tabloid.

    • Bella DuPont says:

      There’s a specific, horrific event which I don’t even want to mention, which women sometimes go through when they have a stressful pregnancy (my sister went through it,sadly)…..

      Heaven forbid, but if any such thing were to happen…..the blame would fall very squarely on the shoulders of the British press, for creating such a hostile environment during such a sensitive time. The fact that they’ve also been so willing to provide a ready platform for the constant Abuse + Bullying that’s been openly done by her family will make them doubly complicit.

      There will be no Diana-death-style, “blame the driver” excuses acceptable.

      They need to back the f-ck off and let this poor woman grow her baby in peace.

      • Kumquat says:

        This is what I believe also. In the opinion of the British media, Megan merely existing as a part of the royal family was ghastly enough. Since she became pregnant they’ve gone completely off the rails. I’m thinking they’re basically at the point of attempting to induce a tragedy.

      • Christina says:

        Amen, Bella DuPont.

      • Jan90067 says:

        Haven’t they (the press) also encited race baiting to the point that actual arrests were made for those going to kill Harry for “race betrayal “ or some some dog-whistle claptrap??? Where the hell will it end??

    • Enough Already says:

      The British people support Meghan and they read the British papers. The People article may have made Meghan and her friends and American fans feel better, YAY!! But it is sure to antagonize the British tabloids and also many British who didn’t like Harry going after them at first.

  8. Vanessa says:

    The British media especially the daily mail are just pissed that Meghan and Harry had a enough of their abuse and fought back . Everything they said about Meghan was refutation not by their so called sources but by her friends they know what Meghan friends are saying is the truth. I don’t believe that the palace had no idea about this they knew and approved this story the daily mail knows that they are counting on the people who hated Meghan to believe that she did this without the palace approve. The British media is angry that Meghan and Harry are no longer going to sit back and allow the daily mail and other British press to attack and abuse them anymore. If the press could attack and racial bully Meghan while pregnant what do you think they would say about Meghan and Harry child . The duke and duchess are taking control of their public image and letting the British media know if they continue they will lose access. And that why the royal reporters and the daily mail are angry they were able to set their narrative tell whatever stories they wanted without push back .

  9. adastraperaspera says:

    I think the headline might better read, “British Press Making the Same Media Mistakes with Meghan as Princess Diana.”

    • 90sgirl says:

      Yes. Exactly.
      Me sipping tea, smiling,.

    • Bella DuPont says:

      What I don’t understand is, they seem to think that as long as it’s not yet as bad as Diana’s situation, then she has nothing to complain about?! I mean, Piers Morgan said that literally on his show during banana-gate.

      So she can only complain when this leads her to hospital…..or what? Why aren’t more people calling these guys out on this?

    • Bohemian Angel says:

      Exactly this!
      I do worry for Meghan, the British press are so obsessed with her and the stories they put out can easily prompt a hater to take things to another level, which is why they need extra security. They also had an unhealthy obsession with Diana and im hoping things don’t end badly like that did.

    • Some chick says:

      Totally agree. This is their best insult yet! Comparing her to Diana! I love it. They just can’t help themselves, can they?

      They might also compare their treatment of her to their treatment of Diana.

      • Fleur says:

        I was a tween when Diana died. Old enough to make abstract observations, young enough to soak up the media like a sponge. I remember how ferociously brutal the press was toward Diana in the year before her death. I have never, even now, seen any one person ripped apart as brutally and mercilessly as Diana was right before she died. They weren’t just obsessed with her, they were gleefully cruel. It was like watching a press version of a gladiator pit. They were ripping into her, spilling her blood for sport.

        Then she died in the car accident, and I distinctly remembered wondering how all of those magazines would treat her in death after they’d been SO cruel to her in the weeks before she died. Within a week of her death, they were calling her an angel. Bunch of hypocrites. I’m starting to think Harry should give up his crown, and they should move to America and live their lives doing whatever the heck they want.

    • Princessk says:

      Well said.

  10. Weaver says:

    I like how the British media is chastising Meghan for an action that would not be be necessary if it weren’t for their lies and harassment.

    • MA says:

      And how they’re chastising her for their retaliation in reaction to her action. “Meghan, you’re playing with fire. Nevermind that we’re the ones choosing to launch our fire at you.”

  11. Jessica says:

    Screw the racist DM. I do not even hate responding anymore regarding their articles.

  12. Beach Dreams says:

    No. In fact I think it’s the press that are making the same mistakes. This is a different news/media era; gone are the days when royal reporters could push their stories without getting challenged. That’s what seems to bother them the most: that people aren’t just believing or quietly ignoring what they say. They’re actually being called out this time around.

    • Vanessa says:

      So true nothing pissed off men more than a woman standing up for herself and taking control of her stories her narrative . They know what Meghan friends are saying is true that why their getting pissed because they no longer have the power they thought they did over Meghan and Harry they thought that because Meghan and Harry were quiet. For all the people saying it’s bad idea that Meghan challenge the British media she expected her first child with her husband she has been rake over the coals for years now if Harry and Meghan don’t take stand now what do you think the British press is going to do to their child when it’s born. If anyone is making a mistake is the racist disgusting daily mail .

      • Beach Dreams says:

        Yeah, I don’t get why people think her friends speaking out is a bad move at this point. The trolls will never change their minds. The British press continued to write trash even as they promoted that #hellotokindness nonsense. This was a well-seized opportunity for Meghan’s friends to speak out against the smear campaign. And they’re absolutely right; doing this to a woman who’s heavily pregnant is beyond the pale.

  13. Becks1 says:

    I absolutely do not believe for a second that this was done without Harry’s knowledge and approval. Everything we have read says that he has been chomping at the bit to defend Meghan. And I just dont think she would take a step like this without his approval/involvement/whatever.

    I also do not think this was done without at least Charles’ approval.

    I ALSO doubt that this done without the Queen’s approval.

    So for me its like a spectrum – 100% Harry was okay with this, probably 95% chance Charles was okay with it, and 90% chance the queen was okay with it.

    Meghan is a smart cookie, she is not going to alienate her new family AND the british press at the same time. Maybe they (Charles/the Queen) didnt know exactly when this story was coming out, or how many friends would be quoted in it, or something, but I just cant believe that Meghan would take this step without going through some sort of palace channel.

    I am enjoying seeing the British press combust over this though. Are they angry that she struck back, or are they angry that she used People mag to do so?

    • Royalwatcher says:

      Not only this, but ALL the other royals have friends who speak to the press off the record on their behalf! Doesn’t the queen’s cousin routinely give interviews (on the record)? Both Charles and Diana had friends (or themselves) giving interviews during the ‘War of the Wales,’ William’s friends anonymously spoke to the press at different times when he’s been criticized, Kate and her family have DM reporters on speed dial (not to mention Pippa, James and Carole giving on the record interviews!!), and Harry’s friends spoke out anonymously after his Vegas pictures got out.

      They ALL do it. But, once again, it’s Meghan who is supposedly breaking some royal taboo or going against royal norms or pitting royal reporters against the family or whatever. I don’t remember this level of blowback or threatening headlines about ‘playing with fire’ when Carole gave her recent interview.

      It’s also interesting how the royal reporters are completely MIA about Andrew’s connection to Epstein – a very real news story – but every breath Meghan takes is worth weeks of criticism and nitpicking. Enough. Where is Hello mag now with their hellotokindness campaign?! Does it not apply to reporters as well? That was one short-lived campaign!

      • Vanessa says:

        Everything Meghan does is controversial to the British press they forget how every other royal have friends speak out on their behalf when a royal is getting bad press . For people and the press to act like it’s never been done before when there proof that every royal i repeated has done before is just mind blowing. The British media is so hell bent on trying to convince their readers Meghan is the outliners she doesn’t belong that their are willing to go to lengths that are extremely creative controversial when in fact there is none . Meghan has done anything that any of their royal fave hasn’t done including Kate and her family which is changed the narrative that the press has created. No one should be subject to the abuse and Meghan has endured through it all she hasn’t complained the daily mail has made her first pregnancy a nightmare they have rampaged up the abuse they have encouraged the vile racist disgusting behavior of sick people who wish harm on Meghan .

      • MA says:

        No, surely Meghan’s friends talking to People deserve the no less than 7 scathing Daily Mail articles today, not to mention takedowns by every single tabloid writer…not the prince who’s friends with a convicted pedophile and who also has allegations of his own. This information that Meghan cooks for Harry and her friends is sure to destroy the monarchy!

    • 90sgirl says:

      William and Kate both have had friends (and family) speak out for them in the past.

    • Enough Already says:

      Maybe Harry, but no one else.
      Never explain, never complain.
      That is the BRF. Meghan doesn’t listen to this maxim at all. She is playing with fire here.

      • Vanessa says:

        Every royal has had their friends speak out for them when they couldn’t so spare me Meghan is playing with fire line . The press can’t do anything to her physically all they can do is continue to print lies about her they been doing that for the past three years now why is ok for the palace to issues denial about stupid rumors about Kate having hair extensions but they did nothing in regards to on going racist hateful campaign toward a pregnant woman . The reason why her friends spoke out is because they saw up close and personal the affected the bullying is doing to Meghan . Why are people not more outrageous and disgusting at the British media for the racist disgusting behavior toward Meghan instead she playing with fire maybe we should be talking about the daily mail unhinged racist obsessions with Meghan .

      • MA says:

        “She” isn’t complaining though. Like William, Kate, Charles, etc. she is having her friends talk to the media as sources to defend her. What she’s doing isn’t actually unprecedented.

      • Skipper says:

        But to Meghan it’s all just noise . She doesn’t read what’s written about her. She’s above that

    • MA says:

      Agreed. Contrary to the media narrative, Meghan isn’t a rebel. When you look at the rebel stories they’re really made of fluff, invented protocol nonsense when in reality, she’s really fallen in line. Plus she’s also painted as very smart by both her fans and detractors, even the tinhats agree. A smart person wouldn’t burn bridges with her husband, father in law, and boss for really nothing in return. Especially after said boss gives her 2 prestigious patronages.

  14. Toot says:

    Those British rags were not letting up on Meghan. This People article pissed them off because her friends aren’ t talking to them, and we know they’ve tried talking to her current friends.

  15. Lisa says:

    The big problem seems to be that Meghan and Harry are not giving the British media access. I do not blame them at all. The press has been merciless and Meghan has taken it and they can stay mad that she set a few things straight. They can continue using her father and Samantha to bully her but it is now known exactly why she will not be in contact with them especially when her child is born.

    • Royalwatcher says:

      I’m curious what you mean by “access?” The Sussexes give the British media as much or more access as every other royal. Photographers have even said that Meghan is better than some other royals (specifically, the Cambridges, per the photogs) because she will give them all a wave at engagements so they can get a good photo and they appreciate this. It’s like on the one hand she is being kinder to them than other royals (in the sense of helping them make money with good photos) and yet they treat her like garbage and there is this false narrative that she’s giving them less access.

      • Lisa says:

        By access I mean like things regarding her book launch. Even some candid photos when she is off duty. The royal reporters get caught flatfooted a lot of the times because very few leaks and sources of information come from Harry or Meghan. This is not a case of Princess Diana who gave access to certain individuals in the press constantly.

      • Royalwatcher says:

        Ah – thanks for clarifying. I still think they give as much access as the others though. Do we ever see Camilla or Charles when they are off duty?

      • Lisa says:

        No we do not see Charles and Camilla outside of their duties. However Harry and Meghan are younger and popular so candids are desired. I read that it was requested that they get some candids of Meghan and they were swiftly denied. You don’t see Harry and Meghan outside of public engagements and they keep their circle loyal. The one time we have seen a candid of Meghan has been with their new hire at Kensington Palace and I do not believe that was an accident either to distract from the bad press with Prince Philip or as a statement things were about to change.

      • MA says:

        I think “access” may mean scheduled pap strolls?

        Interesting to note that they were all caught flat footed. But the morning of the launch, I seem to recall that a few of them personally got copies of the cookbook? Scobie, Hannah Furness, Chris Ship, (I forget who else, but the ones I consider “real journalists). I don’t think Palmer, Emily Andrews, etc. got them though. Pretty funny.

  16. Malcolm H. says:

    Wow that DM article is disturbing and unsettling.

  17. RoyalBlue says:

    I for one believe the Brexit guy is helping her structure this comeback.

    Day 1 – Endeavor dinner
    Day 2 – People magazine release
    Day 3 – release news of Morocco visit.

    N.b. Continue to smile and ignore the British press and step out confidently wearing Givenchy.

  18. TheOriginalMia says:

    The People magazine article was the perfect response to the British tabloids. The Royal Reporters can suck it! The fact Omid Scobie is out here liking Serena’s truth sipping tea tweet tells me everything I need to know about the People issue. Meghan isn’t without allies and those allies aren’t royal syncohants or British dailies. They will speak up and call out the racism and double standards and keep it 100 percent.

  19. Lorelei says:

    Richard Kay is such a disingenuous, passive-aggressive POS. That article is awful.

    First, he goes on and on about everything Diana allegedly did “wrong” (when btw Kay himself was one of the reporters Diana would call to leak her side of things), then after regurgitating all of that, throws in “but of course no one is saying Meghan’s situation is anything like that!” Okay, so then why did you just spend two pages on it, jackass. There is NO comparison between the Panorama interview and anything Meghan has done, but he took this opportunity to plant the similarities in everyone’s minds.

    Then he has the balls of STEEL to claim, “She seems to feel that she is not liked by the public – a myth, of course, but based, I would suggest, on the hateful remarks penned online by trolls.” when he is one of the leading trolls. Not to mention the fact that his paper, the DM has been one of the worst offenders when it comes to bullying Meghan (“Straight Outta Compton”) and hosts the worst of the racist trolls in their comment sections. I absolutely can’t stand this guy!

    /rant

    • Arunkma says:

      @Lorelei, yep so disingenuous. He should be ashamed of himself that this is what he does for a living.

    • MA says:

      The media is the one perpetuating the myth that she’s not liked by the public. See Rhiannon’s coverage during Christmas day, where she actually had the nerve to ask waiting people if they dislike Meghan. And the media are the absolute problem. See the #HellotoKindness pivot and DM’s troll takedowns. The trolls aren’t the ones giving her estranged father a platform to emotionally abuse her in front of a global audience. I highly doubt that Meghan cares about the basement dwellers spreading their tumblr conspiracy theories to their audience of a few thousand. The British tabs are no doubt acting maliciously and in bad faith, there’s no way they’re this blind. Their hypocrisy is unreal.

      • Arunkma says:

        @MA, you do make a good point that perhaps it will benefit her to have another narrative out there, particularly for the headline skimmers. I suppose we shall see!
        I also totally agree with you that it’s a fiction invented by the tabloids that she’s under fire from the public. Most British people don’t care one way or another, as far as I can tell. I do care about the massive spending as a tax payer, but that’s not just a Meghan thing.

    • Tourmaline says:

      Yeah that is so hilariously apt. The giant picture in the article of Diana’s Panorama interview and then Richy boy goes, OH NO I DON”T MEAN THIS IS LIKE THAT AT ALL!

      Comparing Diana’s Panorama interview or the Andrew Morton tell all with innocuous inside info in People like, Meghan is a good hostess to her visiting friends and like candles, is ridiculous. But it is similar as to how, for example, they put a big picture of Wallis Duchess of Windsor next to Meghan and say, look they were both American and divorced. A ham handed attempt to dirty her up.

  20. Arunkma says:

    Count me on the side of people who think this was a bad idea. That is, if the goal was to show Meghan in a good light in the UK and have positive PR and endear to her new countrymen and women.
    Was that the goal though? Maybe the goal was to go to an American outlet garner sympathy that way and be “untouchable” in terms of American and other non-British support? In any case, it starts a war with the British tabloids (tabloids, not general media/press, or general public, as I keep feeling like I have to insist!) that they – the tabloids and associated online trolls – will gleefully jump into, and that I don’t see benefiting Meghan much. Oh and her wretched family too. This gives them so much fuel.
    This seems really Hollywood and rather amateur hour. But what do I know, maybe it’s PR masterstroke as someone above has said!

    • CHATNUH says:

      “……….But what do I know.”

    • Vanessa says:

      Meghan goal was to make her side of the story known let’s faces it the British media have run wild and invented a lot of stories about her . They used her father and half sister to tell lies about her her father has convinced the public with the help of daily mail that she abandoned him wants nothing to do with him . When in fact she wanted to repair their relationship all she asked of him was to stop talking to the same press who has been making her life hell all he want in return was a photo op. Yes I think she did the right thing again if Harry and Meghan don’t take control now what do you think the press is going to say about their baby their going to parents soon .

      • Arunkma says:

        @Vanessa, yeah I get all that. So you think this is going to make them stop making up shit about her? I believe not.

    • MA says:

      This wasn’t a perfect response but I don’t think there is a perfect response in this situation and really, can it get worse? She’s given them everything they’ve wanted–high numbers of engagements pre-wedding, a couple international tours post wedding, a lot of quotes and speeches to dissect, she acknowledges the press, makes eye contact with them (something that they have repeatedly praised on twitter as a nice touch because not all royals do it). She can’t win the tabloids over because they’ve always been at war with her and have never been fair to her, and they never will.

      Again, I don’t think this was a perfect PR strategy but I’m not sure what the alternative could’ve been. But her taking the daily attacks and having only 1 negative narrative out there wasn’t going to be sustainable for long. And now there’s at least another positive narrative out there for the everyday casual observer who may just look at headlines and has been getting a negative impression of her for the past couple months. And People has a larger reach compared to other publications.

      Or maybe this is wishful thinking on my part.

      Just a side note though: it’s a media invented fiction that she’s under fire from the public. Most Brits don’t care about the royals.

  21. Summer says:

    Just when things were starting to quiet down.

    • Bohemian Angel says:

      @Summer It might seem that it had gone quiet but once that baby comes along the crazy noise would be back regardless of this People piece. I really don’t blame them for pushing back as most royals do anyway, them not saying anything has only made the tabloid crap seem true to most people. Judging by some talk shows all these lies have been ingrained on people’s minds now so trying to change that narrative is a good thing but I fear it may of came a little too late.

    • Lady D says:

      They are never going to let up on her.

  22. Vanessa says:

    @ Arunka meghan staying silent didn’t help either that’s why the #palace stories took off the way that they did as least with Meghan friends spreaking a lot what we know that was reported as true . I know they continue to made up lies about her but aleast they know now that she fight back she has people in her corner who are able and willing to called the British press out .

  23. aquarius64 says:

    The British press is bent out of shape because Meghan’s friends to People and not them.

    A “friend” of Evil Papa Smurf went crawling to TMZ to claim the People article is a lie and he can prove the texts. Sure Bad Dad is releasing his phone records. But neither the friend or Sam denied the photo op letter. I’m surprised Sr didn’t go to the British press. Is he afraid the British media think he played them and they are out for his blood?

    • MA says:

      Guess it’s okay for everyone else’s friends to talk to the media, but Meghan has to just sit there and take the beatings from the press silently. It’s interesting because friends of the royals have always served as sources for the press (Will, Kate, Charles) but they’ve never complained about that.

    • Lady D says:

      Daddy just gave the DM the letter Meghan wrote him. He’s calling it an attack on him.

  24. Beech says:

    I’ve been following a royal blog and the comments are unhinged. Wrinkled clothing upsets the readers, she’s a grifter, narcissistic, gleefully awaiting a divorce, breaks royal protocol, will bring down the royal family (what?), they are so sick and tired of her antics, um ok. I will grant their complaints of the cost of her wardrobe,but hey she’s a royal, so what. Wonder about the cost of the sumptuous and beaded fabric worn by the queen and Camilla at swanky events. She has no friends they say, she’s ghosted people in her life and oh, she merches, did you know that?

    • lanne says:

      Isn’t it amazing how evil grown ass women can be to other women? Sometimes I wonder what it is. Jealousy (Harry should have married MEEEE)? But based on the images of the trolls (all older women) outed by the Fail, I’ll bet most of the haters are over 40. Racism? Disappointment in their own lives so they lash out at someone they’ll never meet? Left-over middle-school drama? We all know the image of the gross incel/MRA dude playing video games in the basement, but sometimes I wonder what sweetly smiling women I see are secret rabid trolls wishing death and harm on a woman because her clothes are wrinkled or she wears black nail polish sometimes? What drives people to even have that much animus for someone they don’t know and will never meet? What does Meghan represent to them that’s so hateful and abhorrent? The way they write, you would think she was an ax murderer. And they go on and on and on with their hatred. Don’t they get exhausted by it? Is it somehow releasing tension for them? Do they think it’s harmless? If I knew a friend, or a colleague, was writing that kind of vitriol about anyone who hadn’t actively done harm to someone, I would really worry about that person. I would likely start distancing myself as well.

      • MA says:

        All of the above with the unique way that racism makes people go absolutely batshit. See: Obama’s unprecedented treatment as president, such as getting heckled at his State of the Union, meltdowns over flag lapel pins, lattes, and tan suits

  25. Leyton says:

    They are going to be upset but honestly, I don’t care.

    The British Press has been giving Meghan hell her entire pregnant. These people don’t care how stupid they sound, anything they can bash her with (freaking Avocados!) they will without second thought.

    I’m glad she went and had her friends come together to refute all of those lies.

    Now these journalist look like absolutely idiots because these are people who are close to her and gave detailed information (some even they didn’t know) regarding Meghan and called them all liars.

    Whoever was their sources, which I’m still saying the Cambridge’s because they swear up and down KP is okay with their stories, lied to them and made their entire smear campaign against her look like the orchestrated mess it was.

  26. Mrs.Krabapple says:

    The British press can suck it. I wish Harry and Meghan would actually come out and say that. The press has been creating their own self-serving, self-perpetuating stories, and they need to be called out on it. They will print horrible lies and constant criticism, then follow that up with stories of how the lies and criticism are upsetting Meghan, putting a strain on the marriage, etc. If people in Britain believe and support this, then I hate to say it, but I think their racism is showing. (Not that Americans are any better — once Trump won, I knew there were far more racist @-holes in my country than I wanted to believe).

    • Bohemian Angel says:

      @MRS KRABAPPLE, Unfortunately a lot of Brits do believe this judging by what I’ve been hearing on talk shows this past week.

  27. Leyton says:

    Also, can we address how utterly disgusting they are to use Diana in this way?

    They are threatening her with Diana’s fate which would end up with her dead. As the story goes, the media was Diana’s downfall and they’ve been seen as such for over 20 years now. Placing that on Meghan is literally the worst mistake they can make not only with the public and Harry but I would imagine with other Royals too.

    I saw a few non- Royal commenters ask the same on Twitter. What are they trying to allude too?

    • MA says:

      +1 That was my first thought too. It’s disgusting and vile and they are absolutely threatening her. That headline and these attacks should be the actual story. I can’t see how a single decent person can defend this.

      • lanne says:

        Poor Prince Harry to see his mother weaponized like this. It’s truly below the belt. A commenter above didn’t even want to put the thought into words, but there are people openly wondering on twitter and in other places if the editors at these rags are salivating over actual harm coming to Meghan or the baby.

  28. Sparkly says:

    I don’t understand why some people insist that the People article will do more harm than good. After seeing the INSANE amount of ABUSE that she’s suffered in the press, I’m applauding and celebrating that someone actually spoke up in her defense. It’s about damned time. The press’s actions have done more harm than good to their cause, imo.

    • Olenna says:

      It’s called wishful thinking, and I think the British tabloid abuse is only going to get worse, baby included. Anything negative about Meghan is clickbait and her h8ters just eat it up and sh*t it back out like it’s the gospel.

  29. Marie says:

    Reading all these comments and the People piece makes me realize how little Americans and Meghan herself know about monarchy and royalty. I mean – really little.

    Monarchy is one of the world’s oldest institutions, meaning one cannot come from the side and ‘freshen things up’ just like that. There are institutionalized rules and traditions that are there for a reason, namely to preserve the monarchy and pretect it from becoming common. The commoners are necessary for the monarchy, because they pay for it, but they are also its worst nightmare, because royals MUST NOT BE SEEN AS COMMONERS. They are not. The last thing is extremely important. If the monarchy is associated with being too down to earth, too normal and ordinary, it’s the end of the monarchy. Its whole identity is based on being special and above everyone else. And that is what the tax payers are paying for. They are not interested in political feministic views, because that is common. royals are above politics and everything else.

    So When Meghan lets her friend ‘tell it all’ to an american gossip magazine, it’s her commoner Hollywood identity controlling her and not her regal identity. Because common people and celebs do that kind of stuff – not royals. You would never see the queen do that. They are above the Clooneys, Serena Williams, the Mulrooneys etc.

    You must remember that royals are state funded. Hard working people are paying for Meghans clothes, her security, her travels and so on. So when she wants to do things her own way, it pisses of the media and people, because why should they pay for her ‘rule breaking?’.

    For me it is so sad seing a proud, intelligent and independent woman be turned into a stepford wife who cannot speak up for herself, when she is being bullied, attacked and targeted. And all this drama and poor PR just confirms that she was not prepared for what life as a working royal is like. As long as the public is paying her bills and her luxury, they continue to target her when she uses 500.000 pounds on clothing, or ask her friends to paint a picture of her being a devoted Christian.

    That People piece was too private and fragile. The point of being a royal is to let the people think they know you through the small things but never get too private, for that is wheb the hounding starts.

    She will learn, they all do eventually.

    P.S. I am not justifying the horrible treatment, she has received. I feel really sorry for her. I am only trying to explain the way these things function. Royals are not obliged to any form for privacy or being let alone by the media as long as they are funding ‘The Firm’. That is the rationale, sadly. And that is why most of the royals are playing by the rules – because it will simply make their life easier.

    • Tourmaline says:

      Royals surely are obliged to some form of privacy and being let alone. The fact that they receive public funding definitely does not mean they are wholly owned and to be exhibited like animals in some cruel zoo.

      Just like people that receive any government funding, like Medicare funded health care, do not forfeit their privacy and autonomy and become public chattels just because they are recipients of a government program.

      • Marie says:

        You can say that – but the people and the media thinks otherwise. And in the end, royals are depending on both the people and the media in order to survive, and the trade off is their privacy.

        You cannot compare funding royalty and then medicare. Medicare or health insurance is a democratic right in Europe, royalty is anything but democratic. It is inherited and not everyone are entitled to this kind of luxury. And most importantly – you cannot choose whether you want to pay for the monarchy or not. You are obliged to pay for it, and that makes many people think they are entitled to form an oppinion on everything that they do – because they pay for their job and wellbeing which involves glamour and luxury whilst many commoners of the nation is struggling. That part is hard for Americans to understand, as you don’t nearly pay as much in taxes (or for princes and prinsesses) as in many european monarchies.

        I live in a monarchy myself – and my experience is that nothing is more fuelling to republican views than over-spending in the luxury department. Something Markle has managed very well her first year. As long as she continues to make choises that upsets the public, which basically are her employers, she makes it harder for herself.

      • Tourmaline says:

        @Marie – re democratic concepts – the people of Great Britain could end monarchy if they wanted to, if enough joined the republican movement. It isn’t written in stone and irrevocable that a modern country like Great Britain must have a monarchy.

      • A says:

        @Marie, it’s really funny that you bring up Meghan’s over spending on luxury designer clothing as something that fuels republican views. Aren’t luxury clothes what set royals apart from commoners? And isn’t that what commoners want? For royals to be royals? If Meghan chose not to wear designer clothing, wouldn’t that make her far too common for a royal and wouldn’t it also count against her? So which is it? Is she to behave as a royal behaves, which is above petty common concerns like money and where it comes from and how it gets into her pocket, or should she start worrying about paying the bills just like the rest of us proles?

    • A says:

      Here’s the problem though–the royals aren’t actually above politics. They are a political institution through and through. That is a consequence of living in the world. They can try and hold themselves apart from politics and “commonnness” as much as they like, but history has shown that this is entirely to their detriment, because people see through this time and again. The royals are political by default, because everything is political. Even their apolitical stance is political.

      “The royals have endured because they have rules to protect themselves from becoming too common” Um, no. No. I’m sorry, but in my perspective, this couldn’t be further from the truth. The royals have repeatedly taken a great deal of damage from the public and the press because they have failed throughout their history to connect to the common people and their struggles. The thing that has kept them going is their emotional connection to their people and their struggles. Queen Victoria’s popularity suffered immensely after she shut herself away and refused to participate in a public life after her husband died. Her son’s relative popularity, in spite of his torrid personal life, was because he was charismatic and gregarious. The image of the Queen Mother visiting the destroyed remnants of buildings and homes during the London Blitz in WW2 struck a chord in her subjects because it showed that she was intimately connected to the war effort on a personal level.

      It was only in the aftermath of WW2 and in the middle years of the Queen’s reign that people saw the popularity of the RF decrease, and this was entirely because the establishment failed to move with the times. The insistence that Charles marry a young aristocratic woman with no “history” was outdated and an incredibly poor decision. The Queen failing to address the nation immediately after Diana’s death garnered her as much criticism as it did praise when she finally delivered her speech. The Queen starting her speech in Irish after becoming the first monarch to visit the Republic, Charles shaking Gerry Adams’ hand, the Queen visiting the victims of the Manchester bombing, the whole thing with Philip failing to apologize to the lady he struck with his car–I could go on and on, but the point is this: people want a personal connection with their royals. That is what keeps them in their jobs. They want to know that the royals care about the same things they do, whatever they may be. The idea that they are too above an aloof is what will ultimately send them packing, and it nearly has.

      • ADS says:

        @Asays According to you: “royals MUST NOT BE SEEN AS COMMONERS. They are not.” – This is inaccurate. I’d wager that the majority of the members of the Royal Family are commoners and only royal by marriage. So Meghan is in good company there. Everyone has had to ‘learn’ the rules, it’s just that some started earlier than others.

        You also say: “So When Meghan lets her friend ‘tell it all’ to an american gossip magazine, it’s her commoner Hollywood identity controlling her and not her regal identity.” – This is also nonsense. As others above have discussed, Diana and Charles were absolute experts at this stuff. And the stories surrounding them were much more sordid. Let’s not forget that Charles was recorded telling Camilla that he wished he was her tampon. And this was whilst he was still married to Diana. The leaks and sanctioned ‘anonymous’ sources has been the standard royal way for centuries.

        I’m British I must say that your comments read to me like someone who buys into the mystique rather than the reality of these people. The RF have been messy from jump. See Andrew’s literal child molesting ways and Prince Philips recent car accident involving an INFANT – for which he did not apologise until he was put under a great deal of pressure. Meghan is an amateur in comparison to the really problematic people in that family. And that is why I think the constant criticism of her is patently about the racism of the British media.

  30. IlsaLund says:

    The Washington Post has an interesting opinion piece on Meghan’s mistreatment by the British tabloids:

    What the Meghan Markle-Kate Middleton ‘feud’ says about Britain and the world – The Washington Post
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/02/08/what-meghan-catherine-feud-narrative-says-about-britain-world

    • MA says:

      Thanks for posting that. I agree with every single word. I hope more outlets pick it up.

    • sunny says:

      Yup to that piece. Totally agree. Thanks for sharing it.

    • Bohemian Angel says:

      Wow, that article hit the nail squarely on the head. Thanks for posting!
      Meghan came here at the absolute worst time, slap in the middle of Brexit where a lot of people want to see a white Britain and want the 1950s back again.

  31. Marie says:

    @tourmaline – you are absolutely right. But it is, and that’s why it is called one of the world’s oldest institutions. It’s not something that is easy to abolish, as it has been there for centuries, and one cannot remember a british society without the monarchy.

    EU – on the other hand is a much younger and more fragile institution, hence Brexit is an easier process to put through than the making of a republic. Because many brits remember how things were before the country joined the european union. Just remember how the formation of republics happened in France and Russia (which became a socialist state) – it happened with revolution and manslaughter. That’s how written in stone it actually is, and history actually tells us that in order to go from monarchy to a republic, a great revolution must take place. And Russia is only 100 years ago, Geeece even less.

    In any way – the media, the Royal Family and the public are codependent on each other, and at times it is great. The RF is an attraction and an asset for Britain. At other times the relationship is brutal, bullying and demanding. Meghan Markle is living through the last part. And I think she will come around and see that being a royal rebel isn’t a life she wants to live, because the people doesn’t necessary want feminists who want to change the world. William and Kate have chosen the low key path and after many years they have found a balance with the media etc. She was bullied as well in her first years, but I do not recall it being as bad as with Meghan.

    • Bohemian Angel says:

      @marie Once the queen passes I’m sure that will be the beginning of the end of the British royal family, thank God! The younger generation aren’t bothered with them, the republican movement is on the rise, a few commonwealth countries now want to be Republic. Its the older lot that long for the empire that are keeping this family firmly where they are, the little Englanders. Once they pass away most people won’t really care for the Windsors at all.

    • A says:

      “the royal rebel isn’t a life she wants to live” No offence, but she could toe the line to the absolute letter, and yet the press would have an issue with her because of her race. Aside from the clothing expenses, she isn’t turning the royal world upside down in any capacity, not any more than anyone else did in the past. I honestly don’t know who you’re talking to when you say that “people don’t want feminists who want to change the world” because 1) that isn’t what she’s aiming to do, and 2) really? People don’t want that? Because from my view, people have only ever been impressed about her stances because they think it’s about time that the royals started shifting to reflect the changing times. There’s a reason why royal brides no longer promise to “obey” their spouses in their wedding vows, and why they’ve switched royal inheritance to equal primogeniture and now allow royals to marry Catholics without consequences. If the royals didn’t move along with the times in their own peculiarly royal way, they wouldn’t exist. No one wants an outdated institution that refuses to reflect their own anxieties and necessities. I wouldn’t want to pay for an institution that failed to connect and didn’t reflect the people it’s purporting to represent.

      @Bohemian Angel, “a few commonwealth countries want to be republic” No offence, but this is actually much harder to do than it sounds. There are plenty of Commonwealth countries that would undergo a great deal of political turmoil if the royals were removed tomorrow. There are treaties that have been signed with indigenous entities that were signed with the crown as an entity. If Britain became a republic tomorrow, all of those treaties would have to be renegotiated at great cost. If the republican movement actually picks up steam and becomes a viable option at any point, you can expect at least some pushback from commonwealth nations who are ultimately going to have to pick up a tab for abolishing the monarchy.

      • Marie says:

        Wow ya’ll! I went to sleep (live in Europe) and there were so many posts her about republicanism versus monarchy! I love to discuss this, because as many of you point out, it’s so damn complex. I just presented some of my thoughts on the monarchy as an institution, it’s not the whole truth obviously. I just feel that parts of the american media don’t know and understand about the complexity of the institution that Meghan has married into. I live in a monarchy in europe (not britain) in a former colony. I know many of the feelings that are connected to the monarchy on first hand.

        Anyways.. but yes. You are right pointing out that it’s hypocrite calling out Meghan’s over spending and at the same time criticizing her for turning to commoner celebrity methods with this tell-all story. And that was actually a part of the point – because it’s all about the balance. It’s about representing the fashion industry (which also signals status) and at the same time sprinkling it with high street choices that the commoners can afford, letting the commoner think that we are just like them, but at the same time not at all. It’s about letting people think they know you and think you’re on of them and at the same time protecting your privacy and being something special.

        And some of you pointed out that the monarchy is political. There is also some truth to that, yes. It once was highly political, as monarch were rulers until the 19th century where many monarchies turned into constitutional monarchies. Now the monarch acts as a state overhead and represents the country in formal occasions, and in Denmark the crown prince is a part of the IOC, which is highly political. That has also furied the public because they didn’t want him to be political. They want him where they think he should be – doing charity and waving (charity is also politics, I know). BUT – they are still to keep a distance to hard politics. if they start to involve in too political issues, they become publicly funded royals with fierce political views, and then there is no longer need for them, as most of the countries do have parliaments and paid politicians to do that. The RF is something else – a fantasy, an ideal that the public can look up to.

        And you are also right to point out that it also needs to modernize for else it becomes too distant from the public. Whe have seen it with divorce tolerance, marrying for love etc. Of course they will need to modernize – BUT… again – becoming too much like the commoners also removes the idea and justification for the monarchy – for if they are just like you and me, but only paid for – then what’s the point? Then anyone should be able to apply to take care of the job. And one should be able to for being a royal and public servant. If they are just like you and me, it gets harder to justify the inherited part of the game.

        And lastly.. some of you also pointed out Russia and France. Marie Antoinette was ignorant and highly over-spending in a time when the public was struggling. She was too distant from the public, and it (among other things) stirred a reaction. The point was to understate that monarchies are fragile and if they don’t nail the balance between being high society and at the same time reaching out to the public, they are doomed. And that has happened the last 100 years. That’s why Lizzie cares so much about the traditions, rules and its identity but at the same time tries to modernize SOME parts of the monarchy.

  32. Rosie says:

    It’s impossible to judge if this was a mistake or not but I can’t see how the Mail could get any worse. Getting the information out about the letter to toxic Tom is a win. It needed saying, and no amount of meditation & karma would fix that injustice. It would have eaten me up if I was in her shoes, thankfully she’s stronger. I’m all for never complain, never explain but absolutely not in that instance. The rest of it was a bit overdone for the British audience but I don’t know if that many will actually read it all as it’s only quoted in the mail and its an overseas publication. I think the Royals do best when there is more mystery and Marie has given a pretty good description of the relationship between the monarchy and the British people. Richard Kay is right about one thing she is liked, she doesn’t need to worry so much about that.

  33. liriel says:

    Well, it’s not house of cards level smart. The People magazine was too heavy handed and honestly I agree with Marie. The concept of monarchy is so dated now but M&K shouldn’t publish any more stories about them doing yoga, being religious etc. TQ is a great example – yeah, she did have to show sorrow after Diana but other than that she’s stoic. Kate has learned and not much is known about her, to this day. That’s why when celebitchy insist she doesn’t have friends, other claims she has but are discreet – that’s what monarchy is about. H&M are impulsive and M wants a positive PR which I get but nope. so extra!

    • Bohemian Angel says:

      The problem following the Queen’s example is that we are living in a new era, back in the day people never showed emotion, they were happy to be called ‘subjects’ they happily bowed for King or Queen, Britannia ruled the waves and all that, but we are living in a different time now. The younger generation don’t want to see or pay for a family that are distant, snobby and who they can’t connect with, what’s the point. They want to see a fairer society not one of unfair privilege. So how do we know that Harry and Meghans way isn’t a bit more benefital to the royals, where people feel a bit more of a connection, it’s the younger generation they have to appeal to not just the older ones who will pass away sooner rather than later.

      • liriel says:

        As Vi said too heavy handed. obvious and hollywood. Part of the appeal is all we can do is speculation.

    • Vi says:

      Yes,it was heavy-handed. For those saying that they all leak stories to the press,it’s true but they do it in small doses maybe using a trusted reporter. Not in this way.
      And the timing is very strange because her family is quiet and,aside from bananagate that was not her best idea and everyone could have predicted the mocking and criticism , all the pre-Christmas stories feel like old news,including the mariJuana wedding bags.
      Her friends can’t even debunk all the stories about her and Harry being entitled and demanding before the wedding,because what would they know about how KP and Buckingham handled their wedding,what would they know about people working with them.
      Those who believe these stories,and some of that stuff looked blatantly leaked from palace aids and was even on reputable papers like The Times,are not changing their mind because her friends say she’s nice with them,makes tea ,cook for them and she’s close to God.
      Her father is different issue. I understand why she wants to give her version. But he was quiet, so it would have made more sense if he was in the press every week like this summer. Niw I think he’s going to resurface again in the next days.
      And she could have leaked strategic bits to a reporter they trust. Omid Scobie for example. He offers their most positive coverage,amost like a personal press officer.

      • liriel says:

        Exactly, small doses. “Friends” the people and OTT sugary story. Good point that her father seemed to shut up finally. I know everyone cares about their image but Meghan cares too much. Maybe it’s the Hollywood thing but it’s not going to convince naysayers.

  34. Mrs.Krabapple says:

    “If the monarchy is associated with being too down to earth, too normal and ordinary, it’s the end of the monarchy.”

    Yeah, I’m sure that is exactly why France got rid of Louis XVI and Russia got rid of Tsar Nicholas II — because both rulers were much too “down to earth” and “ordinary.”

    • A says:

      Hey now! Tsar Nicholas II was just like the rest of us! Are you also not a wannabe ruthless autocrat who was ignorant of how the vast majority of your country was suffering under incredible poverty and lack of education while you lived in relative comfort and wealth in six different palaces? Did you also not enter an incredibly ill advised war even though your country was woefully unprepared for fighting it? Did you not take control of your army against EVERYONE’s advice even though you have no experience with military matters, suppress personal and political liberties including free speech depending on when it suited you, do little to nothing when control of your government was slowly usurped by a wandering fraud of a peasant because it might have upset your wife? Because I did all of those things just last Tuesday, and I’m a commoner!

      • Mrs.Krabapple says:

        Lol. Now that I think about it, I do have a penchant for Faberge eggs (the chocolate ones at Easter).

    • Marie says:

      @mras.krabapple. Being ordinary is the end of monarchy because what’s the point with paying millions every year to the institution if they are just like you and me? The we should also have the chance to live in luxury and visit charity events on the expense of the tax payer.

      Being over-spending and distant from the public like Marie Antoinette is also the end of monarchy. It’s all about balance.

      Being too political and involved in politics is also the end of monarchy, for monarchies have democratic institutions to take care of that.

      The point with that quote was to understate that the monarchy becomes more and more fragile, because it’s roles becomes more and more delegated to other parts of socitety. Then what’s left for them? That is what they need to demonstrate all the time and it becomes harder and harder.

  35. A says:

    So, the British tabloid press expect that Meghan and the royals will be handing over their exclusives to them, but they also won’t print anything favourable to Meghan, won’t allow her to set the record straight, will continue to hound her by leveraging her emotionally abusive family against her, and all of this will continue because they want to sell papers and get clicks.

    But Meghan can’t protest this at all, she has to go with it, and accommodate them in every way, in spite of how they treat her. And if she tries to set the record straight in her own way, with outlets that are friendly to her and will print her side of the story, she’s disrespecting the tabloid establishment and she will have to suffer for it, until they see fit to turn the tide favourable to her.

    • liriel says:

      To be honest, other members of the royal family were grilled too but didn’t do something that obvious.

      • Olenna says:

        Other royals were grilled about Meghan’s character or their own character? Since you seem to have the real insider tea, can you tell us why we aren’t seeing stories about Andrew and his association with pedo Epstein?

  36. Well-wisher says:

    Spot on for now.

  37. Princessk says:

    So has the Platell woman. Moir, Richard Kay, Street Porter and the odious Morgan scumbag , all from the Daily Mail and non stop writing about Meghan who is their number one cash cow.